Red Sea / Reed Sea?

Question

in the bible Moses parted the red sea, apparently this was a mistake made by the translator of the king james I bible, which should have read the sea of reeds, apparently it is documented that he admitted missing out an E. my point is we are led to believe in a great miracle that Moses parted a great ocean. yet having also read the Tora all he apparently done was find a path through a marsh, called the sea of reeds. having said how can we believe in legitmacy of the bible, this with many other errors. and its no good saying man wrote it, because if it was the word of God himself then I doubt it would be wrong?

Answer 1

Read the passage again.

Scholars have been debating for decades what body of water Yam Suph refers to in Exodus 13.18 -- whether for example it is the Gulf of Suez, the Gulf of Aqaba, or one of the large lakes north of the Gulf of Suez.

The Hebrew word "Suph" does appear to be derived from the word for "reed", but it is unclear exactly how the sea got this name. Translations of the Hebrew have, since ancient times (starting with the Septuagint in the 2nd century B.C.E.) identified the body of water as what we now call the Red Sea (including the gulfs of Suez and Aqaba), and there is plenty of good reason for doing so (it is NOT a simple error of dropping a vowel, and is NOT limited to the King James translation).
Note for example 1 Kings 9.28 which refers to ships being launched to sail the Yam Suph from Elat (Aqaba).

Regardless of what you think the name of the sea means, all you have to do is read the story of the crossing in the Torah to see that the author is describing some sort of miracle, and not a simple marsh crossing.

Answer 2

The Sea of Reeds is a shallow arm on the Red Sea where reeds grow. A low tide and a strong wind will part the Sea Of Reeds without a miracle.

Answer 3

Red Sea is a common translation of two Hebrew words yam suph. Yam means “sea,” but suph does not normally mean “red.” Suph often means “reeds” (Exod. 2:3,5; Isa. 19:6) or “end,” “hinder part” (Joel 2:20; 2 Chron. 20:16; Eccles. 3:11).

Yam suph could be translated “Sea of Reeds” or “Sea at the end of the world.” The earliest known translation of the Hebrew Bible (the Gk. Septuagint about 200 b.c.) translated yam suph consistently with Erthra Thalassa “Red Sea.” Jerome continued the process in the Latin Vulgate (a.d. 400) by using Mare Rubrum “Red Sea” for yam suph. Most English translations have followed the Vulgate and use “Red Sea” in the text with a footnote indicating the literal translation is “Reed Sea.”

The OT uses the term yam suph to refer to more than one location. In Exod. 10:19 it refers to the Gulf of Suez as the place where the locusts were driven and destroyed. In 1 Kings 9:26 it refers to the Gulf of Aqaba where the ships of Solomon’s navy were stationed. The same location may be indicated in Jer. 49:21 where the cries of Edom could be heard. The “Way of the Red Sea” (yam suph) is part of the name of a highway out of Egypt (Exod. 13:18; Num. 21:4; Deut. 1:40; 2:1; Judg. 11:16). The “Red Sea” was the name of a camp along the way from Egypt (Num. 33:10-11). Yam suph marked the ideal southern border of Israel (Exod. 23:31), but the most significant reference of “Red Sea” in the OT was to the place where God delivered Israel from Pharaoh’s army (Exod. 15:4,22; Num. 21:14; Deut. 11:4; Josh. 2:10; 4:23; 24:6; Neh. 9:9; Pss. 106:7,9-11,22; 136:13-15).

No one knows the exact location of the place where Israel crossed the “Red Sea” on the way out of Egypt. Four primary theories have been suggested as to the place of the actual crossing of the isthmus of Suez: (1) the northern edge of the Gulf of Suez; (2) a site in the center of the isthmus near Lake Timsah; (3) a site at the northern edge of the isthmus and the southern edge of Lake Menzaleh; and (4) across a narrow stretch of sandy land which separates Lake Sirbonis from the Mediterranean Sea. Although no one knows the exact site of the crossing, the weight of the biblical evidence is on the side of suggested site number two.

- But if you think it was a marsh, it was an even greater miracle for God to drown the entire Egyptian army in a marsh!

Answer 4

There are plenty of Bibles out there that are accurate translations. King James was a joke. Personally, I own the one endorsed by the Society of Biblical Literature. Actually, it says "Sea of Reeds", not Reed Sea and certainly not Red Sea. I like to point out to so called Christians what the Bible really says about Homosexuality, now that's interesting.

Answer 5

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls made it clear that the bible has been mis translated throughout history.

I have never heard of the Reed vs Red that you are refering too, sounds a bit suspect though as the bible wasn't written in English and mis interpreting Red to Reed from Hebrew to Greek, or Greek to English may be next to impossible.

Answer 6

Yes, water levels in the Reed Sea did occasionally drop down and leave a clear path across. But, the whole point of that story is that Moses was able to make the water levels drop on command through God's power. On command.
Give me a break. This is such a stupid reason to mistrust the bible. There are thousands of better ways to question the existence of God.

Answer 7

This was an error. It was NOT the "reed" sea. It never was.
It says in the Psalms that they were led through "the deep"
This is just yet another lie, or a supposed "explanation put forward by people that do not wish (for whatever reason) to believe miracles and acts of God happened.

Answer 8

The point of the story is that He redeemed His people from 400 years of slavery in Egypt and then gave us our most precious gift -- the Torah -- our instructions for Life!
.

Answer 9

it was the red sea, its a true story. i have never heard of the reed sea, does it even exist? however the red sea is real and you can go and sea it any time.

Answer 10

Strange how the Torah is translated by all of the jewish scholars to "Red Sea" as well. Are you saying that the jews don't know their own scriptures?